Why do you choose to be an atheist?

I have come to believe that atheism is a choice and not a deterministic result of following science or going "where the evidence leads." So, for the atheists or agnostics perusing this forum, why have you chosen to live in a world without a God?

Replies to This Discussion

A profound question Alexander. I agree it would have to be purely a matter of choice and not based on scientific data, seeing that virtually all the "proofs" given to demonstrate the "truth" of evolution are easily undermined and refutable. Indeed; why WOULD someone choose to live in a world without God? What a bleak and terrible place it would be without God. Imagine that, here we are, hurtling through space at 66,000 mph, and there's no one in charge!?! Scary! Ron C.

While these responses are intriguing, the audience attracted seems altogether different than that desired. A word though, the evolution/naturalism framework builds a rational framework from irrational/contradictory presupposition. That is why we often run into brick walls, as if we talk evidence back and forth it ends up pointless. The presuppositions are what we need to steer toward.

Stay tuned Jeannette. Hopefully we can have a conversation with a few.

Jeannette Parry said:

The answer must be in Romans 1

Speaking about ungodly men...:

" ﻿19﻿ For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. ﻿20﻿ Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; ﻿21﻿ for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. ﻿22﻿ Claiming to be wise, they became fools, ﻿23﻿ and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles."[The Revised Standard Version].

However, I doubt if many atheists or agnostics consciously realise that they are deliberately rejecting their Creator.

Often it seems we are beating our heads against a brick wall in trying to explain the scientific reasons why Evolution just doesn't work. Truly "they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened".

Probably explaining the grounds for Creation being good science would only help someone who was willing to believe but had genuine intellectual doubts.

I'm giving up for now on that kind of debate!

D. Ron Craig said:

A profound question Alexander. I agree it would have to be purely a matter of choice and not based on scientific data, seeing that virtually all the "proofs" given to demonstrate the "truth" of evolution are easily undermined and refutable. Indeed; why WOULD someone choose to live in a world without God? What a bleak and terrible place it would be without God. Imagine that, here we are, hurtling through space at 66,000 mph, and there's no one in charge!?! Scary! Ron C.

Good point Brian! That's, hopefully, the point of this thread; presuppositions and how they lead ultimately to the choice of the individual in their belief.

Brian Guiley said:

While these responses are intriguing, the audience attracted seems altogether different than that desired. A word though, the evolution/naturalism framework builds a rational framework from irrational/contradictory presupposition. That is why we often run into brick walls, as if we talk evidence back and forth it ends up pointless. The presuppositions are what we need to steer toward.

And yet, supposedly, evolutionists have found a "god" gene that they claim pre-disposes us to believe in God biologically. I can find the reference if you're interested.

Even if you believe it is a default position, why to you consciously choose now to keep that position rather than living in a God created world? How do you justify maintaining it if you knew you could choose to leave it?

Jim W. said:

I disagree. Atheism is a default position. As children we are'infected' with idea of Gods.

And yet, supposedly, evolutionists have found a "god" gene that they claim pre-disposes us to believe in God biologically. I can find the reference if you're interested. Even if you believe it is a default position, why to you consciously choose now to keep that position rather than living in a God created world? How do you justify maintaining it if you knew you could choose to leave it?

The "god-gene" is simply named very badly and in fact isn't even peer reviewed, so I lend it no credence. I think it would better be described as a gullibility gene, but that would be too harsh for the general public to read.

Why do I maintain that position? Well I am an ex born again fundamentalist christian now atheist. I am an atheist simply because there is insufficient evidence to believe in gods. Everything in nature we used to explain away with God is simply now better explained by science and without the intervention of any deity.

Did you find suficient evidence to cease your belief? Why does a scientific explanation of the things we used to explain with a god a better or more justified explanation and why does it appeal to you more to have you choose it over living in a God created world?

Jim W. said:

Alexander Martin said:

And yet, supposedly, evolutionists have found a "god" gene that they claim pre-disposes us to believe in God biologically. I can find the reference if you're interested.Even if you believe it is a default position, why to you consciously choose now to keep that position rather than living in a God created world? How do you justify maintaining it if you knew you could choose to leave it?

The "god-gene" is simply named very badly and in fact isn't even peer reviewed, so I lend it no credence. I think it would better be described as a gullibility gene, but that would be too harsh for the general public to read.

Why do I maintain that position? Well I am an ex born again fundamentalist christian now atheist. I am an atheist simply because there is insufficient evidence to believe in gods. Everything in nature we used to explain away with God is simply now better explained by science and without the intervention of any deity.

Did you find suficient evidence to cease your belief? Why does a scientific explanation of the things we used to explain with a god a better or more justified explanation and why does it appeal to you more to have you choose it over living in a God created world?

I find scientific evidence far more compelling than biblical claims of 'miracle'. Science is demonstrable, repeatable, and has physical evidence. The bible is none of those things.

The more I learned about science and reality, the more excuses and mental gymnastics I had to do to justify a belief in the bible or God. Eventually it reached a breaking point. The bible simply is not congruent with reality.

As an atheist, I really want to make this very clear. I don't care if evolutionary theory is true or false regarding my lack of a belief in a god. Atheism predates Christianity. It even predates Judaism. So atheism was around long before Darwin. Evolution could be completely wrong (which is unlikely), and if it could be proven that life was created, I still wouldn't know who or what created us. My first guess would be aliens instead of an infinitely complex, all powerful, intelligent, and supernatural agent without a maker itself. God just doesn't make sense to me.

What I do care about is the lack of evidence for God. The only "proof" Christians seem to give now-a-days is a presupposition argument. Presupposing a god exists to prove that god exists is a vicious circular argument. There are other arguments for the existence for God, but they are all philosophical, and all have been refuted. There is absolutely no scientific evidence for the existence of God, and nothing in nature, so far, has required a supernatural explanation. Is it really so surprising that so many in scientific academia are atheists? Of course, all the arguments for god are only in favor of showing a deist god exist; it's a big stretch to go from god exists to the God of Christianity exists. My challenge to Christians would be to first defend the authority of the Bible, but somehow, I never get a satisfactory answer.The best I get are personal anecdotes, and those don't count as evidence.

So to answer your question, you're absolutely right. Atheism is not the result of following science. Science cannot and will never disprove the existence of God any more than science could disprove that there isn't an invisible teacup in orbit around Jupiter. You cannot prove a negative. However, if someone gives insufficient evidence to believe that something exists, your default position should be to not believe them. If I told you I had a pink elephant in my garage, would you believe me or would you doubt me until I could provide pictures or evidence? I would hope you would doubt me, because the bigger the claim, the more evidence is required to back it up.

Anyway, I see no evidence for the supernatural or superstition. Of course, if you do have evidence in something like telekinesis, please raise my hand. :)

I also want to clear up another strawman some Christians make regarding atheists. Some Christians argue that people are atheists because they really do believe in God but just like to "sin." While I don't believe in the concept of "sin," I do try to live a good life. I volunteer, I don't engage in sex outside of marriage, and I live a life of poverty with most of my earnings going to the less fortunate. Please take my word that I honestly don't believe God exists no matter what the Bible may say. I beg you not to make such outlandish statements about atheists. While some atheists are rather brash, some are the nicest people you could ever meet. Most everyone wants to be a good person regardless of their religious beliefs or lack thereof. I hate to see Christians smear the good names of many atheists by making blanket statements saying people are only atheists because of their love of "sin."

So I hope that answers your questions. I have chosen to not believe in God because I don't see evidence for God nor do I see evidence for the supernatural. That's all. there's no alternative reason. I don't believe in God for the same reason you don't believe in Santa Clause.

What if I showed you that science was nothing more than conjectures and refutations and your believing in science to provide you a worldview was just as justified as believing in God?

Go ahead. You won't be the first who has tried.

I despise the term "worldview". When people start talking about having to wear "bible colored glasses" or the like, I have to ask WHY would you need to change what reality is showing to you to make it consistent with what the bible claims you should see? If the two are not consistent, one of them MUST be wrong. You then have to assume nothing and find out which is correct and which is wrong.

If you are free of mental defect and are seeing a lion, a tiger, and a bear in side your garage, then there MUST be a lion, a tiger and a bear in your garage! Changing your "worldview" isn't going to change the fact that if you walk into your garage wearing a suit made out of beef jerky you will soon find yourself passing the tonsils of three different animals!